Ali al-Khawahir left his victim paralysed a decade ago and is now facing the same fate from the waist down if he fails to pay compensation of one million riyals (£176,000).Al-Khawahir's mum has been begging wealthy philanthropists to come forward to contribute to the fund.

It's hardly an eye for an eye if someone's getting chopped over the back like a water buffalo in front of Col. Kurtz, is it?Or does he have eyes on his shoulders? Oh wait, did the first guy lose an eye, or did he get stabbed in the back? Right, because if he did the it makes sense, if you change it to 'back for a back'.

YoOjo:It's hardly an eye for an eye if someone's getting chopped over the back like a water buffalo in front of Col. Kurtz, is it?Or does he have eyes on his shoulders? Oh wait, did the first guy lose an eye, or did he get stabbed in the back? Right, because if he did the it makes sense, if you change it to 'back for a back'.

I take it english isn't your first language? Or maybe your meds are in need of a refill?

Meh...he's had plenty of time to come up with the money for restitution. He did what he did, and now it's time to pay the piper. While it's harsh, so is the life his victim will be forced to live out. Only difference is that his victim got to spend an extra 10 years suffering, whereas douchie-boy got to walk around on two feet.

Instead of eye-4-eye, wouldn't a better arrangement be to make him be his (former) pal's legs for the rest of their lives? Being his slave in all things physical would take away his freedom of movement, just in a different way from the paralyzed guy.

Well, that sucks. If I'm not mistaken, Saudi Islamic law allows the victim's family to make the decision and if the family's victim decides to take money as compensation for the crime, than the perpetrator can be set free. But it's entirely up to the victim's family if they are willing to forgive.

If they really want to "make the punishment fit the crime" and all that, and the criminal isn't paying up, he should have to serve his time as the bound servant of his victim. Waiting on him hand & foot, obeying his every whim, wiping his ass when he shiats, etc. Make him actually pay for the result of his crime, and benefit the victim. While I'm sure the victim will have some mental satisfaction from knowing the attacker is also paralyzed, I don't see how it helps anyone out in the long run.

LewDux:Ali al-Khawahir left his victim paralysed a decade ago and is now facing the same fate from the waist down if he fails to pay compensation of one million riyals (£176,000). Al-Khawahir's mum has been begging wealthy philanthropists to come forward to contribute to the fund.

Farkers, we you can save him, we you have Paypal technology

The question remains, why would we want to? The same question nobody bothered to ask before creating the bionic man.

Question: If he has been in jail since he is fourteen years old, how can he be expected to earn the 1m riyals that have been awarded? If he is paralyzed, who will support him and his lack of prospects, allah?Wouldn't it be better to put his ass to work caring for his victim or working and paying his debt awarded? After all if they paralyze him, the victim gets nothing.

Daedalus27:Question: If he has been in jail since he is fourteen years old, how can he be expected to earn the 1m riyals that have been awarded? If he is paralyzed, who will support him and his lack of prospects, allah?Wouldn't it be better to put his ass to work caring for his victim or working and paying his debt awarded? After all if they paralyze him, the victim gets nothing.

If they really want to "make the punishment fit the crime" and all that, and the criminal isn't paying up, he should have to serve his time as the bound servant of his victim. Waiting on him hand & foot, obeying his every whim, wiping his ass when he shiats, etc. Make him actually pay for the result of his crime, and benefit the victim. While I'm sure the victim will have some mental satisfaction from knowing the attacker is also paralyzed, I don't see how it helps anyone out in the long run.

malaktaus:If you support the death penalty- and, what, 85% of Americans do?- why would you consider this sick?

Because there was no death involved in this case, only horrific injury. The death penalty is about harm reduction by eliminating the most dangerous individuals from society so that they cannot commit any future harm. So far the penalty (10 years in jail and 1m in restitution) doesn't seem too far off from what he may get in many countries. The only difference is the paralyzation if he doesn't pay up and that seems excessive and counterproductive as you will be unable to collect the restitution if the criminal cannot meaningfully work anymore (please note, I know paralyzed individuals can be productive members of the workforce, but this is a unskilled person with a criminal record so that the job prospects are minimal beyond manual labor which has been taken away as a job catagory if he is paralyzed)

If they really want to "make the punishment fit the crime" and all that, and the criminal isn't paying up, he should have to serve his time as the bound servant of his victim. Waiting on him hand & foot, obeying his every whim, wiping his ass when he shiats, etc. Make him actually pay for the result of his crime, and benefit the victim. While I'm sure the victim will have some mental satisfaction from knowing the attacker is also paralyzed, I don't see how it helps anyone out in the long run.

Oh you silly silly emotional carbon sack.

It's not about the victim. That's vengeance. Find a Batman for that.

Removing someone society that is a problem, that will likely remain a problem, and would tax the jail system, remove them. Problem solved.

I swear to christ people get all involved with the ideology that 'all life is equal'.

Also, I did a lot of stupid stuff when I was 14 but I managed to keep myself from stabbing anyone in the back or anywhere else for that matter. I have to imagine he knew about the whole 'eye for an eye' thing back then.

I would think that if the perpetrator become the indentured servant of the victim then he would just make sure and kill him this time. What would he have to lose? He's already stabbed the guy in the back once, and a lifetime of wiping this guys ass isn't going to set well I am guessing. So kill him once and for all. If he did it right, they would think it was due to his injuries and maybe your indentured servitude would be over. Doesn't sound like the best of ideas, even though it is intended to help out the victim. But that's just my two cents.

Things are different in Texas than in turban-land. We guys tend to protect girls more than boys. I think it is human nature here, don't know why. Am not a psychologist, but my sister is a prof in that field; time to email her.